Lindsay (DPZ): Across the toll road
is considered adjacent. Would require separate zoning to consider properties that
are adjacent not contiguous.

Suggested wording change for Site Focus description:

Proposed
modified language for the scope of the Joint Development Solicitation

At minimum, joint development
proposals must include the County-owned site adjacent to the proposed Metro
platform in parcel G-4. Preference will be given to proposals that also include
assemblage of contiguous and/or adjacent parcels to
include land units within ¼ mile of the station to produce a
well-designed, coordinated, transit-oriented development project.

After discussion the proposed language change was
unanimously approved.

Supervisor
Hudgins:

Purpose of convening the group was
to insure that citizen input was not left out.

It is imperative that we keep in
mind the deadline and the need for timeliness in developing alternatives for
joint development.

Air rights will be involved in
developing the County owned property.Air rights on the federally owned property requires
approvals and is likely to cause delays. At best, we might want to have a
criteria that includes air rights, specifying which locations,but since this was not included in the
EIS and could cause a delay. Air rights can’t result in a delay in the project.

Karl Rohrer, in a recent letter,
captures the emphasis – “need to avoid risk of missing the joint development
opportunity trying to get perfect.”

Karl
(DRPT): They looked at air rights and felt they could not take on this
dimension in the project time frame.Costs are likely to outweigh benefits.These are:

1.
use/approval issues

2. FAA issues

3. other
Federal concerns

Frank:Can we get a non-standard pedestrian walkway?
Could include other uses on the walkway (i.e. newspaper
stand).

Karl:Must meet metro design standards. Requests of
changes in scope (i.e. the County or the developer) must take care of the cost.
There are operating cost issues as well. (Who maintains the “extra stuff”.)The WMATA design
standards were in materials from the 6/30 meeting.

Community Input During Preliminary
Engineering (P.E.)

·Public input around specific practical issues
dealing with P.E. for the project.

Laurel Hill joint development of high school and SouthCounty
building are good models for our work.Carey reviewed the roles of the technical advisory committee (TAC) and
the selection advisory committee (SAC) in this project.He indicated that the Steering Committee may
have a role in either of these, it is most likely that
the voting members in the selection process will be senior county agency staff.

Chip Gertzog reiterated that while
there is broad opportunity for public involvement in the process of developing
and issuing a CountyRFP, once it is issued
this becomes a purchasing process bound by strict rules that require arms
length by anyone who may be construed to have a vested interest or who could
influence the outcome of selection process.

To facilitate input on the principles and the proposed
process, it is suggested that developers, financiers, area property owners, be invited
to a meeting for review and discussion with the Steering Committee members.
Late afternoon, 3:30 – 5:30 pm
was suggested as a good time.Potential
dates for thismeeting
are:

·Wednesday, October 6th

·Tuesday, October 12th, or

·Wednesday October 13th

Supervisor Hudgins staff will look for an appropriate
meeting location for the developer meeting.Possibly in the area of the Wiehle Ave Station.

Next two Steering Committee meeting dates:

·Monday, August 23rd,7
pmThursday,
September 9th7 pm

·Discuss whether a chair is needed for the
steering committee.

·Discuss date and sites for field trip to visit
other Metro Joint Development areas.

·Steering Committee members should bring names
and contact info for the “invite” list for developers, landowners, etc., for
October meeting.